Talk:CentralTrak: The UT Dallas Artist Residency

Cleanup tags/Possible deletion

The topic of this article may not be notable, considering it is a local residency program. It also needs more reliable sources because the sources are primary sources affiliated with the subject. ~~JHUbal27 03:52, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Although the subject of this article (CentralTrak) is affiliated with a Texas university, it is an international residency which hosts and exhibits artists from all over the world that are notable themselves, according to Wikipedia standards. Imintoleather (talk) 21:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Notable alumni

I have no removed external links from the body of the article three times per WP:EL. I'm inviting the author of the article to come here and discuss why they feel that they should be included despite our guideline on external links. OlYeller21^Talktome 15:33, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The reason I have included external links specifically referencing CentralTrak alumni is to demonstrate the validity of the artists in the broader art world as reviewed or written about in an art journalistic context. Since your revisions, I have started only using artists that already have their own Wiki pages, in order to strengthen the links internally. Does this help? I appreciate any feedback or advice on how to better and more thoroughly create this article. Imintoleather (talk) 21:40, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that does help. The others that you had listed may even be notable and justifiably belong in that list but notability needs to be established. The easiest way to do that and the best way to do that for Wikipedia, is to create an article for each other those people. As for helping with notability of the program, having those notable people go through the program doesn't really establish notability for the program in the same way that a golfer's elementary school isn't notable because he went there.

I noticed that you've added several sources to the article and some of those may be useful for establishing notability. I was going to wait until you were done working to assess those articles and respond in the article's AfD. I hope all that is making sense. Notability can be a bit tricky to wrap your head around as a new user. If you have any questions, feel free to ask them here and I'll do my best to answer them. OlYeller21^Talktome 21:45, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying that. I agree that notability is difficult to establish, especially if there aren't documented direct correlations. However, I would also wonder that an artist's participation in a residency program functions as an opportunity to create work that furthers their career as an artist. Therefore, any notability resulting from that work (demonstrable or not) could be potentially attributed to the work completed during that residency. It just seems a bit more relatable, doesn't it? Am I being too abstract? I am attempting to learn past my new usership as quickly as possible, so forgive my confusion. Imintoleather (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:54, 8 April 2013 (UTC) What are some other ways that I can demonstrate notability? What other things do I need to fix to avoid being deleted? Imintoleather (talk) 21:58, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Ya, that's sort of a grey area. I get what you're saying and can think of some other examples where a person or organization greatly contributed to others becoming notable, in some way. This is essentially why deletion discussion like AfDs exist. Notability isn't black and white so the discussions let a group of editors hash things out and come to a conclusion.

The specific parts of WP:N that would apply here are WP:GNG and WP:ORG. WP:GNG basically says that if an organization receives significant coverage from multiple independent and reliable sources (the link describes what WP considers reliable sources), that subject is notable. There are some stipulations to, though. With bands, if they've received significant coverage from an independent and reliable source but that source is one local neighborhood newspaper, the band won't be considered notable. WP:ORG goes into great depth about how an organization can be notable. It's sort of like a tree and at the top is WP:N with WP:GNG and there are many subsections that split off from that like WP:NBOOK for books, WP:BAND for bands, WP:BIO for people, etc.

At any rate, you've added many references and there's a good chance that some of those constitute significant coverage from an independent and reliable source. I see that many of them are related to Dallas which may pose a problem, though. I'll start looking through them now and see if I can find anymore. OlYeller21^Talktome 22:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, this is so helpful. I'll continue to research for independent and reliable sources elsewhere. At least one of them is from the NY Times website and Glasstire is a Texas-based online art resource, not just Dallas. I'm not sure if this makes a difference. I'll also review the WP guidelines and let you know if I have any other questions. Imintoleather (talk) 22:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

It's hard to say for sure about the Glasstire reference. WP:ORG refers to national coverage so I generally consider any state level coverage to be local unless that state level source is NYT or another very large news organization with a state in the name. If you can find that NYT article, that would be great. We may still have a significant coverage issue but I discuss that below.

I checked out all the references in the article and split them into two group in the section below. I'm going to look for any sort of precedent when it comes to venues that show notable art created by notable people. It's similar to a concert hall and may not fall into any part of WP:N, specifically. OlYeller21^Talktome 23:05, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

This will be very helpful. I'll look over all of these now. Do you think it would benefit this article to switch categorization to a venue rather than an organization? What if there is a lack of national or international coverage? Does that mean that this residency isn't able to have a Wikipedia article? It seems that there are several other residencies with their own articles, but perhaps they exist under a different heading. Thanks for your patience in explaining. Imintoleather (talk) 00:57, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

It's interesting because this appears to be (and you'll obviously know better than I do) that this is a residency program, place of residence, and an art gallery. The question of notability for this subject, even as any of the categories it falls into, seems grey. I've brought up a discussion here where notability in general is discussed and there really isn't a clear answer. The biggest issue, I think, is that we haven't found any national level coverage. At any rate, the subject can still exist on Wikipedia but it may not require its own article at this time. That's saying that it could be included in University of Texas at Dallas academic programs or in University of Texas at Dallas. If that ends up being the case, much of what's in this article could be condensed down into a paragraph. In its current state, I don't think that would be very hard to do without actually removing much information.

The AfD has at two more days and we can extend the discussion if needed. I'll keep following the discussion at WP:N and see what happens. OlYeller21^Talktome 01:21, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm following this thread and it seems that there is a discrepancy of opinion related to the level of perspective or understanding that can be associated with a familiarity with art-world matters, or lack there of. In this context, I must argue that as a residency and a gallery that functions as an exhibition space hosting many different types of art-related events that are considered journalistically relevant, if only on a regional scale, that points to at least enough notability to warrant its own autonomous page, as Bus Stop has mentioned. Imintoleather (talk) 01:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Would you mind explaining why local coverage is not sufficient to establish notability about a gallery, if it is a significant entity operating within a local arts community? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imintoleather (talk • contribs) 01:39, 9 April 2013 (UTC) Imintoleather (talk) 01:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC) And what are the differences between the notability of this article and the notability of other residency articles like this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_of_the_Arts Imintoleather (talk) 01:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

In keeping up with the thread, some very interesting and seemingly valid arguments have been made in support of the case of this residency/gallery warranting its own article. Whether it should be under the category of "organization" or something else remains to be seen. Your thoughts? 64.244.146.98 (talk) 19:30, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Seeing as this article is facing deletion, what would you recommend to prevent this? Can it be converted into a different kind of article? Is there a venue category? It still seems notable to the community to warrant the continuation of argument and discussion. What do you advise? Imintoleather (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I have posted a merger proposal to merge the CentralTrak article into the University of Texas at Dallas academic programs article. Any assistance or advisement on how to enact this change would be very helpful. Thank you. Imintoleather (talk) 18:27, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Notability

I'm going to sift through sources here so that I can make a solid argument, either way, at the current AfD. I'll be assessing each source very conservatively as to make my argument more solid.

This list represents articles that can be used to establish notability but seem to be from local sources

• http://frontrow.dmagazine.com/2011/06/changes-at-centraltrak-kate-sheerin-out-heyd-fontenot-in/
• http://dallas.culturemap.com/newsdetail/arts-centraltrak-director-heyd-fontenot-knows-dallas-can-be-a-center-for-contemporary-art/
• http://www.utdallas.edu/news/2010/01/22-001.php

This list represents articles that can be used to establish notability but don't seem to represent significant coverage (and may be from a local source)

• http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/mixmaster/2012/04/harakiri.php
• http://glasstire.com/2012/04/25/harakiri-to-die-for-performances-at-centraltrak/
• http://frontrow.dmagazine.com/2012/07/art-review-curious-arrangement-cassandra-emswiler-and-sally-glass-at-centraltrak/
• http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/mixmaster/2012/08/ari_richters_the_skin_im_in.php
• http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/mixmaster/2012/11/tiny_thumbs_at_centraltrak.php
• http://www.dallasobserver.com/2013-01-17/calendar/dallas-four-must-see-art-shows/full/
• http://leonalesi.com/blog/?p=230
• http://frontburner.dmagazine.com/2010/01/20/kate-sheerin-to-head-centraltrak/
• http://artthisweek.com/?p=2291

The second list contains many articles that seem to cover the exhibit currently showing at CentralTrak. They often mention CentralTrak several times but I'm not sure that I can call the coverage significant. The first list has three articles that are all about CentralTrak and their directors. A Google News and Google News Archive search show a large number of articles that mention CentralTrak but still, they all seem to be local in nature.

I'm starting to think that WP:ORG may not cover such cases, specifically. I'm thinking that this case is best compared to concert venues. It's not common to see many articles written about the venue itself, unless its to discuss some sort of legal issue like a zoning/code problem or a catastrophe. I'm going to see if there's any sort of precedent set for concert venues when it comes to notability but from the sources above, I think the only thing keeping this subject from easily being declared notable is significant coverage from an independent and reliable source that isn't local. OlYeller21^Talktome 23:01, 8 April 2013 (UTC)